JONATHAN CHAIT NOVEMBER 23, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
A lot of the polling on the Affordable Care Act has had wording that's slanted toward one side or another. McClatchy's new poll seems admirably clean, offering four options: repeal the bill, amend it so that it does less, keep it, or amend it so that it does more. The latter two options have the majority:
A majority of Americans want the Congress to keep the new health care law or actually expand it, despite Republican claims that they have a mandate from the people to kill it, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.
The post-election survey showed that 51 percent of registered voters want to keep the law or change it to do more, while 44 percent want to change it to do less or repeal it altogether.
As per usual, people strongly favor most of the provisions but oppose the parts (like the individual mandate) that are needed to make the popular stuff work.
5 comments
Isn't there an issue between "registered" voters and people who voted in the last election? It's like Dr. Frankenstein looking at the angry mob with torches and pitchforks outside his castle and saying, "Not to worry. I've conducted a poll and 62% of the town residents are in favor of the Frankenstein monster."
- Nusholtz
November 23, 2010 at 11:29am
Huge numbers of people do not understand how all of this is supposed to work. It is beyond depressing.
- liberal reformer
November 23, 2010 at 11:47am
I find endless amusement in the fact that the least popular provision of the health care act (individual mandate) is one which is indisputably a Republican brainchild. Less amusing, however, is the fact that they appear to have convinced the public not only that they did not sire this baby that looks just like them and was found at the Democrats' doorstep, but also that it is an evil offspring and should be euthanized.
- Fishpeddler
November 23, 2010 at 12:20pm
The court cases underway challenging the affordable care act are going to go a long way in determining constitutional interpretation. The individual mandate has to be there to make the affordability side work-yet it is quite harrowing to think that the government can make us do things. Living in NYC I don't drive, so I'm unfamiliar with how this relates to auto insurance but I hear arguments that auto insurance "mandates" are different state to state. And while the ACA gives states some control over individual exchanges, it has to be cleared by the HHS Secretary, meaning the Fed. govt. is the ultimate arbiter of the exchanges. If the courts decide that if the indv. mandate is unconstitutional and it gets repealed, then the cost of health care in the U.S will still be intolerably high with no cost controls, then Republicans can point to it as a failure to control costs. These court cases must be watched closely, because I ultimately agree with the ACA, but the mandate is worrisome because it could lead to the govt. mandating a whole slew of other things. And it probably will, and hopefully in the near future it won't be some conservative-Christian-military- apparatus-give-more-wealth-to-the-richest-starve-the-beast President mandating whatever fits his/her fancy.
- RedState
November 23, 2010 at 12:30pm
scrap the mandate and go with tax and rebate, and use the taxes to fund uncompensated care. If you don't have insurance, no rebate and you can't very well state you will never get sick.
- blackton
November 23, 2010 at 5:43pm